In wrestling with the S.N. I wound up posting an older version of my response to Psik. Most important being my caveat to
What happened to them was beyond the bounds of what anyone imagined - and beyond what anyone could have engineered into a real high rise.Okay, with enough focus and resources an awful lot can be engineered for.
How to Terror-Proof the New World Trade Center Andrew Tarantola - 9/09/11 http://gizmodo.com/5838327/terror-proofing-the-new-world-trade-center
Conspiracies and conspiracy theories are not synonymous.Yes, it is so annoying that the people engaged in conspiracies do not advertise so that the defective theories can be easily eliminated. But then if you just try to resolve something on the basis of physics you are accused of being disingenuous for not subscribing to some conspiracy theory without having sufficient data. psik No, not when you try to resolve something on the basis of physics. It's when you try to resolve something on the basis of a false understanding of physics or a lack of valid information about the conditions that you are accused of subscribing to some conspiracy theory. I want to point out that for all of your minute so-called scientific investigation of what happened to the towers on 9/11, you have yet to describe who might have been involved in a conspiracy, how they carried it out and to what end? All you've done is claim that the towers were brought down by something "other than" the jets running into them. You have yet to explain how or why conspirators were involved or who they might have been, beyond implying, without evidence, that some unnamed people in the US government "must have been" involved. And you still haven't shown any evidence or even an explanation of how or why anyone was involved other than the known perpetrators identified in government and private reports (such as the investigative team at Popular Mechanics magazine, which prepared its own respected analysis and is not under goverment control, though I suspect that you would say they were also part of the conspiracy, too, as is just about everyone must have been who has disagreed with you on your conspiracy claims. Lois
Thinking of conspiracy theories. Why does it seem that the CFI S.N. seems almost malevolent?Because it is, no "almost" about it. I'm beginning to believe that Satan exists, not in Hell, but inside the CFI Forums' computer program, wreaking havoc. " Lois
Thinking of conspiracy theories. Why does it seem that the CFI S.N. seems almost malevolent?Aren't all Nazis malevolent? Lois
I love the article concerning the link between narcissism and conspiracy theorists. I wonder if it is simply attention seeking behavior, or if it (against the logic of the concept of narcissism) is simply that the conspiracy theorist does not care what others think?
I think narcissism, like bipolar disorder, is highly over diagnosed. And diagnosed by laypersons which does not, in fact, constitute a diagnosis.
Not to ruffle feathers, but I also think 9/11 was an inside job.
A fair majority of the bad things that occur to individuals on a personal level and to a people on a societal level are inside jobs. That is conjecture on my part. But, still my belief.
How about this theory? Cyber terrorists could be coercing governments across the globe to do their bidding. They could be gang stalking individuals. They might be drugging and poisoning individuals. They could be responsible for the bizarre neurological symptoms those in the Cuban embassy experienced a few years back. 
How about this.
The Cheney/Bush Administration were ignoring their National Security Experts about increasing evidence pointing towards a terrorist attack being planned. But, seen in the light of past terrorist attacks, damaging an embassy, damaging a Navy ship, they never ever ever ever imagined that those ‘towel heads’ could come up with something more than another peashooter attack. So they let it slid. Bring it on you terrorists was the unspoken sentiment permeating the White House gang of profiteers. Because then they knew they’d be able to lather up the voters and come out with all guns blazing.
Surprise, surprise the ‘towel heads’ were smarter and shrewder and more ruthless than the self-certain pigs running our government at the time. But, then we’ve been excellent teachers and they been excellent students, while we dither along within our self-certain sense of superiority.
Still in the end, after we got over our shock, it worked out pretty good for the profiteers in the long run. America and her people, well that’s a totally different story.
It seems to me that Narcissistic Personality Disorder is not a particularly common diagnosis. It is commonly bandied about these days, but that is because the POTUS appears to have it.
I could easily buy your analysis of what may have really happened in the Cheney/Bush handling of 9/11, CC.
I suppose that is the case vis a via the narcissistic pd, TimB.
I, as well, think 9/11 could have merely been negligence. But more on the end of purposeful negligence.
It seems to me that it was more than not taking the threat seriously. My understanding was that there were vaults which held precious metals which disappeared.
As well, one of the misguided souls who hijacked the plane joked in their Florida flight class that there was no need for them to learn to descent and touch down, just to take off the plane. That level of arrogance is rare in a truly covert, unsanctioned operation as a terrorist attack would normally be considered.
The way the buildings collapsed is also troubling. Investigations aside. The investigations could have been set from the start. I’ve only ever seen buildings collapse in such a manner during skyscraper demos. Cover ups have been quite astounding over the course of history.
And such an event on US soil led to the war, which made lots of people lots of money, as well as positioned our military in a very strategic location. Which we are still occupying (and have recently bombed yet again).
I am war adverse. So I’ll be honest in stating my scope is limited concerning the military industrial complex and geopolitical positioning.